Adjuvant radiotherapy after salvage surgery for melanoma recurrence in a node field following a previous lymph node dissection

Background and Objectives: Adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) can be given to melanoma patients following salvage surgery for node field recurrence after a previous regional node dissection, but the value of this treatment strategy is poorly documented. This study evaluated long-term node field control and survival of patients treated in this way in an era before effective adjuvant systemic therapy became available. Methods: Data for 76 patients treated between 1990 and 2011 were extracted from an institutional database. Baseline patient characteristics, treatment details and oncological outcomes were analysed. Results: Adjuvant RT with conventional fractionation (median dose 48 Gy in 20 fractions) was given to 43 patients (57%) and hypofractionated RT (median dose 33 Gy in 6 fractions) to 33 patients (43%). The 5-year node field control rate was 70%, 5-year recurrence-free survival 17%, 5-year melanoma-specific survival 26% and 5-year overall survival 25%. Conclusions: Salvage surgery with adjuvant RT achieved node field control in 70% of melanoma patients with node field recurrence following a prior node dissection. However, disease progression at distant sites was common and survival outcomes were poor. Prospective data will be required to assess outcomes for contemporary combinations of surgery, adjuvant RT and systemic therapy.</p

Cost-Effectiveness of PET/CT Surveillance Schedules to Detect Distant Recurrence of Resected Stage III Melanoma

Objective: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of three surveillance imaging strategies using whole-body positron emission tomography (PET) with computed tomography (CT) (PET/CT) in a follow-up program for adults with resected stage III melanoma. Methods: An analytic decision model was constructed to estimate the costs and benefits of PET/CT surveillance imaging performed 3-monthly, 6-monthly, or 12-monthly compared with no surveillance imaging. Results: At 5 years, 3-monthly PET/CT surveillance imaging incurred a total cost of AUD 88,387 per patient, versus AUD 77,998 for 6-monthly, AUD 52,560 for 12-monthly imaging, and AUD 51,149 for no surveillance imaging. When compared with no surveillance imaging, 12-monthly PET/CT imaging was associated with a 4% increase in correctly diagnosed and treated distant disease; a 0.5% increase with 6-monthly imaging and 1% increase with 3-monthly imaging. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of 12-monthly PET/CT surveillance imaging was AUD 34,362 for each additional distant recurrence correctly diagnosed and treated, compared with no surveillance imaging. For the outcome of cost per diagnostic error avoided, the no surveillance imaging strategy was the least costly and most effective. Conclusion: With the ICER for this strategy less than AUD 50,000 per unit of health benefit, the 12-monthly surveillance imaging strategy is considered good value for money

The Impact of Surveillance Imaging Frequency on the Detection of Distant Disease for Patients with Resected Stage III Melanoma

Background It is not known whether there is a survival benefit associated with more frequent surveillance imaging in patients with resected American Joint Committee on Cancer stage III melanoma. Objective The aim of this study was to investigate distant disease-free survival (DDFS), melanoma-specific survival (MSS), post distant recurrence MSS (dMSS), and overall survival for patients with resected stage III melanoma undergoing regular computed tomography (CT) or positron emission tomography (PET)/CT surveillance imaging at different intervals. Patients and Methods A closely followed longitudinal cohort of patients with resected stage IIIA–D disease treated at a tertiary referral center underwent 3- to 4-monthly, 6-monthly, or 12-monthly surveillance imaging between 2000 and 2017. Survival outcomes were estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method, and log-rank tests assessed the significance of survival differences between imaging frequency groups. Results Of 473 patients (IIIA, 19%; IIIB, 31%; IIIC, 49%; IIID, 1%) 30% underwent 3- to 4-monthly imaging, 10% underwent 6-monthly imaging, and 60% underwent 12-monthly imaging. After a median follow-up of 6.2 years, distant recurrence was recorded in 252 patients (53%), with 40% detected by surveillance CT or PET/CT, 43% detected clinically, and 17% with another imaging modality. Median DDFS was 5.1 years (95% confidence interval 3.9–6.6). Among 139 IIIC patients who developed distant disease, the median dMSS was 4.4 months shorter in those who underwent 3- to 4-monthly imaging than those who underwent 12-monthly imaging. Conclusion Selecting patients at higher risk of distant recurrence for more frequent surveillance imaging yields a higher proportion of imaging-detected distant recurrences but is not associated with improved survival. A randomized comparison of low versus high frequency imaging is needed

Can patient-led surveillance detect subsequent new primary or recurrent melanomas and reduce the need for routinely scheduled follow-up? A protocol for the MEL-SELF randomised controlled trial

This research project is funded by a National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Project grant (#1163054). The funder had no role in the design of the study and will have no role in the collection, analysis, and interpretation of the data; the writing of the report; or the decision to submit the report for publication. Funding Information: AEC is funded by a Career Development Fellowship from the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC; 1147843). JFT is a recipient of an NHMRC Program Grant (1093017). RPMS is supported by Melanoma Institute Australia. RAS is supported by a NHMRC Program Grant and Practitioner Fellowship. For RAS, support from the from colleagues at Melanoma Institute Australia, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital and NSW Health Pathology is also gratefully acknowledged. RLM is supported with an NHMRC Investigator grant (1194703) and a University of Sydney Robinson Fellowship. HPS holds an NHMRC MRFF Next Generation Clinical Researchers Program Practitioner Fellowship (APP1137127). JH is supported by an NHMRC Early Career Fellowship (1112509). KB is supported by an NHMRC Investigator Grant (1174523) and a University of Sydney Research Accelerator (SOAR) Prize.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Identifying challenges to implementation of clinical practice guidelines for sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with melanoma in Australia: protocol paper for a mixed methods study

Introduction Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) is a diagnostic procedure developed in the 1990s. It is currently used to stage patients with primary cutaneous melanoma, provide prognostic information and guide management. The Australian Clinical Practice Guidelines state that SLNB should be considered for patients with cutaneous melanoma >1 mm in thickness (or >0.8 mm with high-risk pathology features). Until recently, sentinel lymph node (SLN) status was used to identify patients who might benefit from a completion lymph node dissection, a procedure that is no longer routinely recommended. SLN status is now also being used to identify patients who might benefit from systemic adjuvant therapies such as anti-programmed cell death 1 (PD1) checkpoint inhibitor immunotherapy or BRAF-directed molecular targeted therapy, treatments that have significantly improved relapse-free survival for patients with resected stage III melanoma and improved overall survival of patients with unresectable stage III and stage IV melanoma. Australian and international data indicate that approximately half of eligible patients receive an SLNB. Methods and analysis This mixed-methods study seeks to understand the structural, contextual and cultural factors affecting implementation of the SLNB guidelines. Data collection will include: (1) cross-sectional questionnaires and semistructured interviews with general practitioners and dermatologists; (2) semistructured interviews with other healthcare professionals involved in the diagnosis and early definitive care of melanoma patients and key stakeholders including researchers, representatives of professional colleges, training organisations and consumer melanoma groups; and (3) documentary analysis of documents from government, health services and non-government organisations. Descriptive analyses and multivariable regression models will be used to examine factors related to SLNB practices and attitudes. Qualitative data will be analysed using thematic analysis. Ethics and dissemination Ethics approval has been granted by the University of Sydney. Results will be disseminated through publications and presentations to clinicians, patients, policymakers and researchers and will inform the development of strategies for implementing SLNB guidelines in Australia

Close proximity of immune and tumor cells underlies response to anti-PD-1 based therapies in metastatic melanoma patients

Immune checkpoint blockade has greatly improved the clinical outcomes of many patients with metastatic melanoma, however, almost half do not respond. Whether the interspatial distribution of immune and tumor cells predicts response to anti-PD-1-based therapies and patient outcomes in any cancer, including melanoma, is currently unknown. Here, we examined the spatial distribution of immune and tumor cells via multiplex immunofluorescence. Pre-treatment melanoma specimens from 27 patients (n = 18 responders; n = 9 non-responders) treated with anti-PD-1 monotherapy and 34 patients (n = 22 responders; n = 12 non-responders) treated with combined ipilimumab and anti-PD-1 immunotherapy were studied. Responders displayed significantly higher densities of CD8+ tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes within a 20 µM distance from a melanoma cell compared to non-responders in both anti-PD-1 alone (p = .0024) and combination-treated patients (p = .0096), that were associated with improved progression-free survival for both therapies (anti-PD-1 p = .0158; combination therapy p = .0088). In multivariate analysis, the best model for 12-month progression-free survival for anti-PD-1 monotherapy included PD-L1+ cells within proximity to tumor cells and intratumoral CD8+ density (AUC = 0.80), and for combination therapy included CD8+ cells in proximity to tumor cells, intratumoral PD-L1+ density and LDH (AUC = 0.85). Assessment of the spatial distribution of immune cells in relation to tumor cells provides insight into their role in modulating immune response and highlights their potential role as predictors of response to anti-PD-1 based therapies

Improved Risk Prediction Calculator for Sentinel Node Positivity in Patients With Melanoma: The Melanoma Institute Australia Nomogram

PURPOSE For patients with primary cutaneous melanoma, the risk of sentinel node (SN) metastasis varies according to several clinicopathologic parameters. Patient selection for SN biopsy can be assisted by National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) and ASCO/Society of Surgical Oncology (SSO) guidelines and the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) online nomogram. We sought to develop an improved online risk calculator using alternative clinicopathologic parameters to more accurately predict SN positivity. PATIENTS AND METHODS Data from 3,477 patients with melanoma who underwent SN biopsy at Melanoma Institute Australia (MIA) were analyzed. A new nomogram was developed by replacing body site and Clark level from the MSKCC model with mitotic rate, melanoma subtype, and lymphovascular invasion. The predictive performance of the new nomogram was externally validated using data from The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (n = 3,496). RESULTS The MSKCC model receiver operating characteristic curve had a predictive accuracy of 67.7% (95% CI, 65.3% to 70.0%). The MIA model had a predictive accuracy of 73.9% (95% CI, 71.9% to 75.9%), a 9.2% increase in accuracy over the MSKCC model (P < .001). Among the 2,748 SN-negative patients, SN biopsy would not have been offered to 22.1%, 13.4%, and 12.4% based on the MIA model, the MSKCC model, and NCCN or ASCO/SSO criteria, respectively. External validation generated a C-statistic of 75.0% (95% CI, 73.2% to 76.7%). CONCLUSION A robust nomogram was developed that more accurately estimates the risk of SN positivity in patients with melanoma than currently available methods. The model only requires the input of 6 widely available clinicopathologic parameters. Importantly, the number of patients undergoing unnecessary SN biopsy would be significantly reduced compared with use of the MSKCC nomogram or the NCCN or ASCO/SSO guidelines, without losing sensitivity. An online calculator is available at www.melanomarisk.org.au.Supported by an Australian National Health and Medical Research Council Practitioner Fellowship (R.A.S), an Australia NHMRC program grant (to R.A.S., G.J.M., and J.F.T.), the Medical Foundation of the University of Sydney (J.F.T.), Melanoma Institute Australia (J.R.S., R.P.M.S., and S.N.L.), the Friends of the Mater Foundation (A.J.S.), an Australian Medical Research Future Fund Rapid Applied Research Translation Grant via Sydney Health Partners (A.H.R.V.), the Robert and Lynne Grossman Family Foundation (J.E.G.), the Michael and Patricia Booker Melanoma Research Endowment (J.E.G.), the National Institutes of Health Specialized Programs of Research Excellence grant in melanoma at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center

Development and validation of a novel model to predict recurrence-free survival and melanoma-specific survival after sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with melanoma:an international, retrospective, multicentre analysis

Background: The introduction of adjuvant systemic treatment for patients with high-risk melanomas necessitates accurate staging of disease. However, inconsistencies in outcomes exist between disease stages as defined by the American Joint Committee on Cancer (8th edition). We aimed to develop a tool to predict patient-specific outcomes in people with melanoma rather than grouping patients according to disease stage. Methods: Patients older than 13 years with confirmed primary melanoma who underwent sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) between Oct 29, 1997, and Nov 11, 2013, at four European melanoma centres (based in Berlin, Germany; Amsterdam and Rotterdam, the Netherlands; and Warsaw, Poland) were included in the development cohort. Potential predictors of recurrence-free and melanoma-specific survival assessed were sex, age, presence of ulceration, primary tumour location, histological subtype, Breslow thickness, sentinel node status, number of sentinel nodes removed, maximum diameter of the largest sentinel node metastasis, and Dewar classification. A prognostic model and nomogram were developed to predict 5-year recurrence-free survival on a continuous scale in patients with stage pT1b or higher melanomas. This model was also calibrated to predict melanoma-specific survival. Model performance was assessed by discrimination (area under the time-dependent receiver operating characteristics curve [AUC]) and calibration. External validation was done in a cohort of patients with primary melanomas who underwent SLNB between Jan 30, 1997, and Dec 12, 2013, at the Melanoma Institute Australia (Sydney, NSW, Australia).Findings: The development cohort consisted of 4071 patients, of whom 2075 (51%) were female and 1996 (49%) were male. 889 (22%) had sentinel node-positive disease and 3182 (78%) had sentinel node-negative disease. The validation cohort comprised 4822 patients, of whom 1965 (41%) were female and 2857 (59%) were male. 891 (18%) had sentinel node-positive disease and 3931 (82%) had sentinel node-negative disease. Median follow-up was 4·8 years (IQR 2·3–7·8) in the development cohort and 5·0 years (2·2–8·9) in the validation cohort. In the development cohort, 5-year recurrence-free survival was 73·5% (95% CI 72·0–75·1) and 5-year melanoma-specific survival was 86·5% (85·3–87·8). In the validation cohort, the corresponding estimates were 66·1% (64·6–67·7) and 83·3% (82·0–84·6), respectively. The final model contained six prognostic factors: sentinel node status, Breslow thickness, presence of ulceration, age at SLNB, primary tumour location, and maximum diameter of the largest sentinel node metastasis. In the development cohort, for the model's prediction of recurrence-free survival, the AUC was 0·80 (95% CI 0·78–0·81); for prediction of melanoma-specific survival, the AUC was 0·81 (0·79–0·84). External validation showed good calibration for both outcomes, with AUCs of 0·73 (0·71–0·75) and 0·76 (0·74–0·78), respectively.Interpretation: Our prediction model and nomogram accurately predicted patient-specific risk probabilities for 5-year recurrence-free and melanoma-specific survival. These tools could have important implications for clinical decision making when considering adjuvant treatments in patients with high-risk melanomas. </p

Development and validation of a novel model to predict recurrence-free survival and melanoma-specific survival after sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with melanoma:an international, retrospective, multicentre analysis

Background: The introduction of adjuvant systemic treatment for patients with high-risk melanomas necessitates accurate staging of disease. However, inconsistencies in outcomes exist between disease stages as defined by the American Joint Committee on Cancer (8th edition). We aimed to develop a tool to predict patient-specific outcomes in people with melanoma rather than grouping patients according to disease stage. Methods: Patients older than 13 years with confirmed primary melanoma who underwent sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) between Oct 29, 1997, and Nov 11, 2013, at four European melanoma centres (based in Berlin, Germany; Amsterdam and Rotterdam, the Netherlands; and Warsaw, Poland) were included in the development cohort. Potential predictors of recurrence-free and melanoma-specific survival assessed were sex, age, presence of ulceration, primary tumour location, histological subtype, Breslow thickness, sentinel node status, number of sentinel nodes removed, maximum diameter of the largest sentinel node metastasis, and Dewar classification. A prognostic model and nomogram were developed to predict 5-year recurrence-free survival on a continuous scale in patients with stage pT1b or higher melanomas. This model was also calibrated to predict melanoma-specific survival. Model performance was assessed by discrimination (area under the time-dependent receiver operating characteristics curve [AUC]) and calibration. External validation was done in a cohort of patients with primary melanomas who underwent SLNB between Jan 30, 1997, and Dec 12, 2013, at the Melanoma Institute Australia (Sydney, NSW, Australia).Findings: The development cohort consisted of 4071 patients, of whom 2075 (51%) were female and 1996 (49%) were male. 889 (22%) had sentinel node-positive disease and 3182 (78%) had sentinel node-negative disease. The validation cohort comprised 4822 patients, of whom 1965 (41%) were female and 2857 (59%) were male. 891 (18%) had sentinel node-positive disease and 3931 (82%) had sentinel node-negative disease. Median follow-up was 4·8 years (IQR 2·3–7·8) in the development cohort and 5·0 years (2·2–8·9) in the validation cohort. In the development cohort, 5-year recurrence-free survival was 73·5% (95% CI 72·0–75·1) and 5-year melanoma-specific survival was 86·5% (85·3–87·8). In the validation cohort, the corresponding estimates were 66·1% (64·6–67·7) and 83·3% (82·0–84·6), respectively. The final model contained six prognostic factors: sentinel node status, Breslow thickness, presence of ulceration, age at SLNB, primary tumour location, and maximum diameter of the largest sentinel node metastasis. In the development cohort, for the model's prediction of recurrence-free survival, the AUC was 0·80 (95% CI 0·78–0·81); for prediction of melanoma-specific survival, the AUC was 0·81 (0·79–0·84). External validation showed good calibration for both outcomes, with AUCs of 0·73 (0·71–0·75) and 0·76 (0·74–0·78), respectively.Interpretation: Our prediction model and nomogram accurately predicted patient-specific risk probabilities for 5-year recurrence-free and melanoma-specific survival. These tools could have important implications for clinical decision making when considering adjuvant treatments in patients with high-risk melanomas. </p

Higher polygenic risk for melanoma is associated with improved survival in a high ultraviolet radiation setting

Background: The role of germline genetic factors in determining survival from cutaneous melanoma (CM) is not well understood. Objective: To perform a genome-wide association study (GWAS) meta-analysis of melanoma-specific survival (MSS), and test whether a CM-susceptibility polygenic risk score (PRS) is associated with MSS. Methods: We conducted two Cox proportional-hazard GWAS of MSS using data from the Melanoma Institute Australia, a high ultraviolet (UV) radiation setting (MIA; 5,762 patients with melanoma; 800 melanoma deaths) and UK Biobank (UKB: 5,220 patients with melanoma; 241 melanoma deaths), and combined them in a fixed-effects meta-analysis. Significant (P Results: Two loci were significantly associated with MSS in the meta-analysis of MIA and UKB with lead SNPs rs41309643 (G allele frequency 1.6%, HR = 2.09, 95%CI = 1.61–2.71, P = 2.08 × 10–8) on chromosome 1, and rs75682113 (C allele frequency 1.8%, HR = 2.38, 95%CI = 1.77–3.21, P = 1.07 × 10–8) on chromosome 7. While neither SNP replicated in the LMC, rs75682113 was significantly associated in the combined discovery and replication sets. After adjusting for age at diagnosis, sex and the first ten principal components, a one standard deviation increase in the CM-susceptibility PRS was associated with improved MSS in the discovery meta-analysis (HR = 0.88, 95% CI = 0.83–0.94, P = 6.93 × 10–5; I2 = 88%). However, this was only driven by the high UV setting cohort (MIA HR = 0.84, 95% CI = 0.78–0.90). Conclusion: We found two loci potentially associated with MSS. Increased genetic susceptibility to develop CM is associated with improved MSS in a high UV setting.</p